Re: No fault cell phone law

Liste des GroupesRevenir à cm android 
Sujet : Re: No fault cell phone law
De : Hank (at) *nospam* nospam.invalid (Hank Rogers)
Groupes : comp.mobile.android misc.phone.mobile.iphone
Date : 21. Mar 2024, 02:54:32
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <utg40t$1r4u5$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
User-Agent : Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 SeaMonkey/2.53.18.1
Andrew wrote:
Carlos E.R. wrote on Wed, 20 Mar 2024 20:14:35 +0100 :
 
Thus I am not reading or
commenting on what you said.
 Doesn't matter. It's all been said before since we've discussed this in the
past in gory detail, where you don't remember anything that was said then.
 The fact remains, everyone thinks that cellphones must raise the accident
rate simply because they're an added distraction, and they are an added
distraction - but there is no reliable evidence that they have any effect
whatsoever on the accident rate in reliably reported USA Census Bureau
Statistics.
 Furthermore, the fact remains everyone thinks making laws to make people do
safe things would lower the accident rate, but again, teh reliable
scientific evidence shows thta also is not the case.
 The laws have no first order effects whatsoever on safety but they do have
a minor but statistically valid second-order effect on length of hospital
stay.
 This was covered on March 16, 2016 on this newsgroup, and again in even
more gory detail on July 6, 2020 on this very newsgroup, Carlos.
 Morons (without a shred of evidence) disputed it then.
Those same morons (with no evidence) dispute it now.
 Morons will always be morons, but the facts remain true.
 The main reason cellphones have no effect on the accident rate is likely
two fold, one of which is there are hundreds of distractions. Adding one is
like adding another hair to your head. It changes nothing in statistics.
 In addition, cellphones prevent accidents, so they have a cancelling effect
on the accident rate because they may prevent as many as they cause.
 It's not clear why cellphones have no effect whatsoever on the accident
rate, but what's eminently clear in the reliable records is there is no
change in the downward trend of accident rates in the USA for decades.
 Just like the first post-Covid should have been a superspreader event if
all the morons were correct (and it wasn't), the facts show that cellphones
do not change the accident rate (neither up, nor down) in effect.
 As with the Fermi Paradox, if you feel otherwise, you have to answer this:
  Q: Where are the accidents?
 
Why not drop it then?
Fiddling with a phone while driving is illegal most places, but a real smart guy could figure out ways to get away with it. Maybe even prove how safe it is.
Get busy, and do something!

Date Sujet#  Auteur
17 Mar 24 * Re: No fault cell phone law36The Real Bev
17 Mar 24 `* Re: No fault cell phone law35Stan Brown
17 Mar 24  +* Re: No fault cell phone law7Frank Slootweg
17 Mar 24  i+- Re: No fault cell phone law1Stan Brown
17 Mar 24  i`* Re: No fault cell phone law5The Real Bev
17 Mar 24  i `* Re: No fault cell phone law4Frank Slootweg
17 Mar 24  i  `* Re: No fault cell phone law3The Real Bev
18 Mar 24  i   `* Re: No fault cell phone law2Frank Slootweg
18 Mar 24  i    `- Re: No fault cell phone law1Andrew
17 Mar 24  +* Re: No fault cell phone law4AJL
17 Mar 24  i+- Re: No fault cell phone law1Frankie
18 Mar 24  i`* Re: No fault cell phone law2Stan Brown
18 Mar 24  i `- Re: No fault cell phone law1AJL
17 Mar 24  `* Re: No fault cell phone law23Andrew
17 Mar 24   +* Re: No fault cell phone law2The Real Bev
18 Mar 24   i`- Re: No fault cell phone law1Andrew
20 Mar 24   `* Re: No fault cell phone law20Carlos E.R.
20 Mar 24    +* Re: No fault cell phone law17AJL
20 Mar 24    i+* Re: No fault cell phone law10Carlos E.R.
20 Mar 24    ii`* Re: No fault cell phone law9Carlos E.R.
20 Mar 24    ii `* Re: No fault cell phone law8Andrew
21 Mar 24    ii  `* Re: No fault cell phone law7Hank Rogers
21 Mar 24    ii   `* Re: No fault cell phone law6Andrew
21 Mar 24    ii    +- Re: No fault cell phone law1Andrew
23 Mar 24    ii    `* Re: No fault cell phone law4The Real Bev
23 Mar 24    ii     +- Re: No fault cell phone law1Your Name
24 Mar 24    ii     +- Re: No fault cell phone law1Harry S Robins
29 Mar 24    ii     `- Re: No fault cell phone law1sms
20 Mar 24    i`* Re: No fault cell phone law6The Real Bev
20 Mar 24    i `* Re: No fault cell phone law5Carlos E.R.
20 Mar 24    i  `* Re: No fault cell phone law4The Real Bev
21 Mar 24    i   `* Re: No fault cell phone law3Indira
21 Mar 24    i    `* Re: No fault cell phone law2The Real Bev
21 Mar 24    i     `- Re: No fault cell phone law1Indira
21 Mar 24    `* Re: No fault cell phone law2Frank Slootweg
24 Mar 24     `- Re: No fault cell phone law1Andrew

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal